alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of
Emerson Radio Corp. (Form S-8 No. 333-63515) pertaining to the Stock
Compensation Program and 1994 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan, of our
report dated June 30, 2003 with respect to the consolidated financial statements
and schedules of Emerson Radio Corp. and Subsidiaries included in the Annual
Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended March 31, 2003, filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission.

                                                     /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
New York, New York
July 11, 2003
# Demand Data

# Explanation
9245143



### THIRD SUPPLEMENT TO FINAL APPLICATION UNDER 49 U.S.C.§ 47134 FOR PRIVATIZATION OF CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT The City of Chicago (the “City”) hereby supplements the Final Application, filed October 14, 2008 (“Final Application”), along with the first Supplement submitted on October 15, 2008 and the second Supplement submitted on March 5, 2009. The City is in continuing deliberations regarding the completion of the Midway Airport privatization. The pace and direction continues to be dictated by conditions in the global credit and capital markets. The City intends to complete the privatization process at the earliest practicable date. The City will report back to the Federal Aviation Administration by April 30, 2010 on further developments with respect to the process to select a private operator.

The date of this Supplement is January 29, 2010.
# C_2013178EN.01001003.xml

| 22.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 178/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 178/10

---

Action brought on 29 January 2013 — Rose Vision and Seseña v Commission

(Case T-45/13)

2013/C 178/19

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Rose Vision, SL (Seseña, Spain) and Julián Seseña (Pozuelo de Alarcón, Spain) (represented by: M. Muñiz Bernuy and A. Alonso Villa, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the General Court should:

| — | annul the decisions to suspend agreed payments; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decisions to suspend agreed payments;

| — | remove Rose Vision, SL from the Central Exclusion Database and the Early Warning System (EWS); |
| --- | --- |

—

remove Rose Vision, SL from the Central Exclusion Database and the Early Warning System (EWS);

| — | order the defendant to pay EUR 5 000 624 in damages. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay EUR 5 000 624 in damages.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

One of the two applicants, an undertaking principally engaged in telecommunications, research and development (R&D) and consultancy services in telecommunications, research and innovation, has worked on numerous projects with the Commission since 2002.

This action has arisen out of two audits of the applicant undertaking carried out between February and April 2011. The audit reports allege a series of failures and irregularities on the part of the applicant undertaking, which were the basis for the suspension of outstanding payments.

The applicants claim that those allegations do not reflect reality. They maintain that it can in fact be seen from a careful reading of one of the two audit reports mentioned above that the aim informing the report was to make an unjustified attack on the applicants for the purpose of discrediting them. In this way, the audit report is mostly based on unverified information. The Commission’s approach is more akin to an investigative, supervisory or inspection-related approach than to that of an audit, in which information must be verified and the reliability of sources ensured.

All of this has caused the applicant undertaking serious harm, not only of an economic nature but also to its professional reputation and to its credibility.

---
# Master

# How it works

# Sheet3
#### *State, Respondent, v. Bird, Petitioner,*

No. 91853-8.

Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, No. 71615-8-I, June 1, 2015, 187 Wn. App. 942. *Denied*November 4, 2015.
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-
43811, 333-85769, 333-85769-01, 333-85769-02, and 333-85769-03 on Form S-3 and
Registration Statement No. 333-43811-01 on Post Effective Amendment No. 1 to
Form S-3 of TXU Gas Company, formerly known as ENSERCH Corporation, of our
report dated February 16, 2000, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of
TXU Gas Company for the year ended December 31, 1999.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Dallas, Texas
March 17,2000
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 135 (Wednesday, July 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38215]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18844]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL RATE COMMISSION


Announcement of Visit

SUMMARY: Representatives of E-Stamp Corporation will visit the 
Commission to present a briefing on a system for electronic generation 
of postage indicia.

DATES: The date of the visit is Thursday, July 16, 1998, beginning at 
2:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Postal Rate Commission (Conference Room), 1333 H Street, NW, 
Suite 300, Washington, DC 20268-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, Postal Rate Commission, Suite 
300, 1333 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20268-001, (202) 789-6820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: During this visit, representatives of E-
Stamp Corporation will brief the Commission on a system for electronic 
generation of postage indicia.

    Dated: July 10, 1998.
Cyril J. Pittack,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18844 Filed 7-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-FN-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,117
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,813
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      6,777
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,251
<PP&E>                                          10,823
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,522
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  30,077
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,283
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            11
<OTHER-SE>                                      16,762
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    30,077
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,979
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,919
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,294
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (89)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,145)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (9,145)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,145)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.80)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.80)


</TABLE>
Order entered November 19, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00227-CR

CASME ALFONSO VELAZQUEZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F14-56517-J

ORDER

The Court DENIES appellant’s November 18, 2015 pro se motion for appointment of 

new counsel.

We GRANT the motion to extend time to file a response to the Anders brief. Appellant’s 

pro se response is due by JANUARY 4, 2016. No further extensions will be granted. If the pro 

se response is not filed by the date specified, the appeal will be submitted on the Anders brief 

alone.

We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order to Casme Alfonso Velazquez, No. 

14039534, Dallas County Jail, P.O. Box 660334, Dallas, Texas 75226-0334, and to all counsel.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
No. 10-1264.

#### Kathleen Allison, Warden, Petitioner v. Steven Diaz.

565 U.S. 802, 132 S. Ct. 75,

181 L. Ed. 2d 1,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6822.

October 3, 2011.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Petition for writ of cer-tiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for further consideration in light of Harrington *2v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86, 131 S. Ct. 770, 178 L. Ed. 2d 624 (2011).

Same case below, 405 Fed. Appx. 123.
No. 10M112.

#### Antonio Velasquez Gomez, Petitioner v. California.

565 U.S. 808, 132 S. Ct. 76,

181 L. Ed. 2d 9,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6751.

October 3, 2011.

Renewed motion for leave to file a petition for writ of certiorari under seal with redacted copies for the public record granted.
No. 10-7325.

#### Steven Louis Hirata, Petitioner v. Gail Lewis, Warden.

562 U.S. 1151, 131 S. Ct. 935,

178 L. Ed. 2d 777,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 312.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 370 Fed. Appx. 833.
# C_2013344EN.01005603.xml

| 23.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 344/56 |
| ---------- | -- | -------------------------------------- | -------- |

---

Action brought on 30 July 2013 — Mayaleh v Council

(Case T-408/13)

2013/C 344/102

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Adib Mayaleh (Damascus, Syria) (represented by: G. Karouni and C. Dumont, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

| — | Annul:
—
Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP of 31 May 2013 concerning restrictive measures against Syria in so far as it concerns Mr Adib Mayaleh; —
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 363/2013 of 22 April 2013 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria, corrected on 9 May 2013 in so far as it concerns Mr Adib Mayaleh; order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs in accordance with Articles 87 and 91 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court. | — | Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP of 31 May 2013 concerning restrictive measures against Syria in so far as it concerns Mr Adib Mayaleh; | — | Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 363/2013 of 22 April 2013 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria, corrected on 9 May 2013 in so far as it concerns Mr Adib Mayaleh; |
| - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| — | Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP of 31 May 2013 concerning restrictive measures against Syria in so far as it concerns Mr Adib Mayaleh; | | | | |
| — | Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 363/2013 of 22 April 2013 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria, corrected on 9 May 2013 in so far as it concerns Mr Adib Mayaleh; | | | | |

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on six pleas in law which are essentially identical or similar to the first, second, third, fifth, sixth and seventh pleas in law relied on in Case T-383/11 Makhlouf v Council.
( 1 )

---

( 1 )  OJ 2011 C 282, p.30.

---
# C_2013171EN.01003401.xml

| 15.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/34

---

Action brought on 8 April 2013 — Stance/OHIM — Pokarna (STANCE)

(Case T-206/13)

2013/C 171/63

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Stance, Inc. (San Clemente, United States) (represented by: R. Kunze and G. Würtenberger, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Pokarna Ltd (Secundrabad, India)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of 1 February 2013 in Case R 885/2012-5 pertaining to the opposition based on Community trademark registration No. 005 491 329 against Community trademark application No. 008 957 516‘STANCE’; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of 1 February 2013 in Case R 885/2012-5 pertaining to the opposition based on Community trademark registration No. 005 491 329 against Community trademark application No. 008 957 516‘STANCE’;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘STANCE’ for goods in class 25 — Community trade mark application 8 957 516

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration of the black and white figurative mark ‘STANZA’, for goods and services in classes 25 et 35

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition for all the contested goods

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 65, 8(1)(b), 75, 76(1), (2) and 83 of Council Regulation No 207/2009.

Pleas in law:

---
Januarv 11.2012 

### JAN 

### 1 8 

### 2012 STATE OFTENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION 

## RA's

# mice DIVISION OFAIR POLLUTION CONTROL 9TH FLOOR L & C 

### ANNEX

40

### 1 CHURCH STREET NASHVILLE, 

### TN 37243-153

### 1

Mrs. Gwendolyn Keys Fleming Regional Administrator US.EPA, Region IV Atlanta Federal Center, 1 

### 2th lo or 61 Forsyth Street, S.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960 Certified Mail #70110110000040086836 Return Receipt Requested

Subject: Official Submittal Request for State Implementation Plan revisions to rules 1200-03-09-.O1 Construction Permits and 1200-03-09-.02 Operating Pem~its. These rules are being amended to include the Federal requirements for Greenhouse GasPermitting Regulations into the State Implementation Plan.
Dear Mrs. Fleming: This is an oflicial submittal request for incorporation into State Implementation Plan revisions to rules 1200-03-09-.O1 Construction Permits and 1200-03-09-.02 Operating Permits. These rules are being amended to include the Federal requirements for Greenhouse GasPermitting Regulations into the State Implementation Plan. As required one copy is included with supporting documentation consisting of a certification of the rules as State effective with the Board order adopting the rule change, a Regulatory Flexibility Addendum, a Impact on Local Governments. Additional Infonnation Required by Joint Government Operations Committee, evidence of a public hearing with notices and comments, and a State effective copy ofChapter 1200-03-09 with the rules included as State effective. Also included is a compact disk containing the documents in Microsoft Word and a hard copyof the rules showing the language change indicated by the strikethrough and redline marks. The Environmental Protection Agency is requested to process the enclosed material as part of the federally approved State Implementation Plan. Ifyou need fiuther information or documentation please contact Malcolm Butler at (615) 532-0600. Sincerely,
Barry R. Stephens,P.E. Technical Secretary " Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board Enclosures cc: Mr. R. Scott Davis, BranchChief
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                       5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF NETWORK-1 SECURITY SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR THE
PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                       JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                         MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                                         7,524,000
<SECURITIES>                                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                    192,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                                      35,000
<INVENTORY>                                                       17,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                               7,860,000
<PP&E>                                                           555,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                                   111,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                 9,026,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                            967,000
<BONDS>                                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                                        2,000
<COMMON>                                                          59,000
<OTHER-SE>                                                     6,465,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                   9,026,000
<SALES>                                                          157,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                 192,000
<CGS>                                                              6,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                     95,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                               1,298,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                30,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                               (1,168,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                           0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                           (1,168,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                 2,028,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                        0
<CHANGES>                                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                                     860,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                                         0.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       0.16



</TABLE>
No. 10-7605.

#### Edward Fox, Petitioner v. Walter A. McNeil, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.

562 U.S. 1202, 131 S. Ct. 1047,

178 L. Ed. 2d 868,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 1001.

January 24, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 373 Fed. Appx. 32.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3053 

To amend title V of the Social Security Act to reauthorize the Personal 

Responsibility Education Program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 3, 2019 

Ms. BLUNT ROCHESTER introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend title V of the Social Security Act to reauthorize 

the Personal Responsibility Education Program. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be referred to as the ‘‘PREP Reauthor5 ization Act of 2019’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY EDU7 CATION PROGRAM (PREP). 

8 Section 513 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

9 713) is amended— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 3053 IH

1 (1) in paragraphs (1)(A) and (4)(A) of sub2 section (a), by striking ‘‘2019’’ and inserting 

3 ‘‘2024’’ each place it appears; 

4 (2) in subsection (a)(4)(B)(i), by striking 

5 ‘‘2019’’ and inserting ‘‘2024’’; and 

6 (3) in subsection (f), by striking ‘‘2019’’ and 

7 inserting ‘‘2024’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
No. 10-9946.

#### Eric Moffett, Petitioner v. Mississippi.

565 U.S. 830, 132 S. Ct. 127,

181 L. Ed. 2d 49,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5318.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi denied.

Same case below, 49 So. 3d 1073.
No. 10-7900.

#### Robert Breest, Petitioner v. New Hampshire.

562 U.S. 1197, 131 S. Ct. 1055,

178 L. Ed. 2d 860,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 921.

January 24, 2011.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of New Hampshire dismissed. See Rule 39.8.